Flood Barriers Made Easier: New Law Allows Build-Outs onto City Sidewalks
April 1, 2014 — A trio of New York City statutes instituted last year are designed to make it easier for co-op and condo boards and other building owners and managers to address the extreme-weather effects of climate change, as well as better prepare for emergencies generally. We've written about Local Law 110/2013, which requires, among other things, drinking-water stations that draw separate from the main water line; and Local Law 111/2013, which addresses the complicated rules that govern backup-power generators.
The third leg of this triangle is Local Law 109/2013, which helps make it easier for buildings to install flood barriers.
As Russell Unger, executive director of the Urban Green Council, describes, many flood barriers work like this: Footings — essentially holes for posts — are drilled deep into the ground. In case of a flood, posts are installed in the footings and barrier panels are inserted to make a temporary wall.
See also...
But in many parts of New York City, the only place those footings could be installed would be on the sidewalk, and that previously was not allowed. The new Local Law 109 permits footings, which are flush with the ground, to be embedded in the sidewalk, up to 12 inches away from the property line.
Buildings that want to purchase flood barriers need permission from the city to install the footings, and they also need permission to deploy them, Unger says. But the law will make it easier for more buildings to have the option.
Dennis DePaola, executive vice president of the management firm Orsid Realty, says one of his clients, 200 East End Avenue, is contemplating flood barriers after massive damage from superstorm Sandy.
The primary consideration in this case is not the ability to place footings into the sidewalk, he says, but the cost of drilling into bedrock for the footings. The law is helpful for many reasons, including psychological ones. Notes DePaola: "It's opened up eyes for a lot of our clients that maybe we should consider this again."
For more, see our Site Map or join our Archive >>